Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
VOCABULARY TEACHING TECHNIQUES IN AN OMANI GOVERNMENT SCHOOL
A THESIS IN TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES
Presented to the faculty of the American University of Sharjah College of Arts and Sciences
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
MASTER OF ARTS
by
BADR ABDULLAH AL JABRI B.A. 2004
Sharjah, UAE SEPTEMBER 2008
© 2008 BADR AL JABRI
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
We approve the thesis of Badr Abdullah Al Jabri
Date of signature
______________________________ __________________
Dr. Cindy Gunn Associate Professor Thesis Advisor
______________________________ __________________
Dr. Betty Lanteigne Assistant Professor Graduate Committee
______________________________ __________________
Dr. Peter Crompton Assistant Professor Graduate Committee
______________________________ __________________
Dr. Ibrahim Sadek Program Director, MA TESOL
______________________________ __________________
Dr. William Heidcamp Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences
______________________________ __________________
Mr. Kevin Mitchell Director, Graduate and Undergraduate Programs
VOCABULARY TEACHING TECHNIQUES IN AN OMANI GOVERNMENT SCHOOL
Badr Abdullah Al Jabri, Candidate for the Master of Arts Degree
American University of Sharjah, 2008
ABSTRACT
Vocabulary teaching has been the subject of much discussion among the
community of English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in government schools in
Oman. It is considered to be one of the causes of the general weakness of students’
levels of proficiency in English. This encouraged me to find out the answers to two
basic questions: What are the vocabulary teaching techniques which a selected sample
of ESL teachers in AbdulRahman bin Auff for Basic Education School, an Omani
government school, use in their classrooms? Do the techniques that they use in their
classrooms reflect the various methods of teaching vocabulary discussed in the recent
literature on vocabulary instruction?
In order to answer these questions, I conducted a qualitative case study in
which I collected data through interviews, observations, and follow-up interviews.
The participants in the qualitative case study were six EFL teachers who have
different experiences and teach different grade levels. I based the analysis of the
collected data on the constant comparison method of analysis in order to establish
semantic themes or categories. The study shed light on the role that methods of
iii
vocabulary instruction play in explaining the general weakness of EFL learners’
English language competence in AbdulRahman bin Auff School.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………… iii LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………. vii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………….. viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………… ix Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................................................................ 4 Introduction………………………………………………………….. 4
The Importance of Learning of Vocabulary....................................... 4 The Insufficiency of Implicit Vocabulary Learning……. 6 Relation of Vocabulary to other Language Skills………. 8 Techniques of Vocabulary Instruction............................................... 11 Conclusion…………………………………………………………… 17 3. METHODOLOGY......................................................................................... 18 Context………………………………………………………………. 19 Participants.......................................................................................... 22 Role of the Researcher........................................................................ 24 Procedures........................................................................................... 26 Interviews………………………………………………….. 26 Observations……………………………………………….. 28 4. DATA ANALYSIS & FINDINGS……......................................................... 31 Introduction…………………………………………………………... 31 Participants’ View of Vocabulary....................................................... 31 Reported and Observed Methods of Vocabulary Instruction.............. 34 Teachers’ Explanations of the Discrepancies...................................... 41 Techniques Used vs. Suggested Techniques…………………………. 43 5. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS...................................................... 48 Introduction…………………………………………………………… 48 Summary of Findings........................................................................... 48 Implications…………………………………………………………… 49 Implications for Teachers…………………………………… 49 Implications for the Ministry of Education........................... 51 Limitations of the study........................................................................ 53 Final Thought………………………………………………………….. 54 REFERENCE LIST 55
v
Appendix A. INITIAL INTERVIEW GUIDE………………………………………… 62 B. POST-OBSERVATION FOLLOW-UP INTEVIEW GUIDE………….. 64 C. OBSERVATION SHEET………………………………………………… 65 VITA……………………………………………………………………………… 69
vi
FIGURES
Figure Page 1. A Vocabulary Exercise from Grade 6………………………………... 21
2. Vocabulary Exercise from Grade 10 Text Book……………………... 22
3. The Data Collection Timeline……………………………………………. 30
vii
TABLES
1. ESL Teacher Participants………….…………………………………… 24
2. Reported and Observed Techniques………………………………... 40
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This is a great chance to express my great and sincere gratitude to those who
have been very cooperative and patient while giving me any help and feedback
throughout my MA TESOL trip. Special thanks to my helpful supervisor, Dr. Cindy
Gunn, for her supervision and assistance to complete the fulfillment of this degree. I
should also express my appreciation to Dr. Betty and Dr Crompton who did not
hesitate to be members of my thesis committee and who followed it up with giving
me very useful feedback to produce a well-written paper.
ix
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Vocabulary is one of the most essential components of language which makes
it very plausible to at least acquire the most frequently occurring words in a language
to able to communicate in that language (Carl, 2003a; Nunan, 1999). Thus, it is ESL
teachers’ responsibility to make sure that learners are exposed to a good amount of
vocabulary in class using the various teaching techniques in that area. However, many
teachers in Oman do not seem to give it much attention in EFL classes because they
tend to think that it will be acquired implicitly through the different activities in class.
The fact is that implicit acquisition of vocabulary has only a minor role in increasing
learners’ vocabulary knowledge (Coomber, Peet, & Carl, 1998). Furthermore, many
teachers themselves complain that most students do not understand what goes on in
their EFL classes regardless of the focus of the lesson. This, students’ weakness, is
something I have noticed in the school at which I teach (AbdulRahman bin Auff for
Basic Education School), and I have heard similar complaints from teachers at other
government schools. It appears that many English language teachers in Omani
government schools do not provide their students with the main tool for
communicating in a language, which is vocabulary.
As an EFL teacher in an Omani government school, I noticed that many of the
students are unable to understand simple sentences which are constructed of high
frequency words although some of the students have been learning the English
language for several years. Therefore, it can be argued that the low level proficiency
of EFL learners in government schools in Oman may be partially attributed to the
2
methods of vocabulary instruction being used at these schools, which I will try to
investigate in this study. This explanation can be very plausible when we realize that a
number of studies indicate that students need to possess good vocabulary knowledge
in order to perform well in the four language skills (e.g. Carl, 2003a; Nation, 1990;
Nunan, 1999).
I hypothesize that the way in which the EFL teacher participants address
vocabulary in their classes may have an effect on their students’ acquisition of new
words. However, it should be clarified that it is not the aim of this study to ascertain
the level of proficiency of the participants’ EFL students. Rather, I decided to conduct
this study to primarily shed light on how the element of vocabulary is being treated in
one particular Omani government school, the school where I am teaching, which can
serve as a sample of government schools in Oman. Thus, this study attempts to gauge
whether or not EFL teachers in AbdulRahman bin Auff School are indeed aware of
the significant role of vocabulary instruction in their classrooms. The secondary goal
of the study is to compare the findings of the study to the effective vocabulary
teaching techniques that are being discussed in current research on teaching
vocabulary in the EFL classroom. In other words, the purpose of this qualitative case
study research is to answer the following questions:
1- What are the vocabulary teaching techniques which a selected
sample of EFL teachers in AbdulRahman bin Auff for Basic
Education School, an Omani government school, use in their
classrooms?
3
2- Do the techniques that they use in their classrooms reflect the
various methods of teaching vocabulary discussed in the recent
literature on vocabulary instruction?
This study is the first to address this issue within the context of Oman as there
are no published research studies that explore EFL vocabulary instruction in Omani
government schools. Therefore, this case study may encourage other teacher-
researchers to investigate their vocabulary teaching practices (and the effectiveness of
said methods), which ultimately could serve to benefit English language teachers and
students in Oman.
4
CAHPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
Many papers have been produced to address the different facets of vocabulary
as the main component of a language. Some of them talk about the essential role that
vocabulary takes in a communicative situation, and how it can impede comprehension
when it is misunderstood. Others address the reasons that clarify the need to set well-
planned lessons to teach vocabulary throughout a language course. Yet there are other
studies that tackle the effect of vocabulary on the different skills of a language and
how learners’ performance improve when they have a good vocabulary knowledge.
To add to that, there are studies which deal with the various strategies that can be used
to teach and learn vocabulary, and what characteristics an educator needs to detect
when choosing a strategy to use in a class. In the following section, I will present the
gist of some of those studies.
The Importance of Learning Vocabulary
The importance of vocabulary has been acknowledged by many scholars. Fan
(2003) clarifies this by quoting Michael McCarthy’s words in an interview for
Cambridge Connection (“interview,” 2001):
Vocabulary forms the biggest part of the meaning of any language, and
vocabulary is the biggest problems for most learners. So I’ve always been
interested in ways of helping learners in building up a big vocabulary as fast
and as efficiently as possible. (p. 222)
5
McCarthy, in the same interview, goes further than that by connecting between the
strength of learners’ vocabulary and their independence and success language learning
process:
The successful learners are those who develop techniques and disciplines for
learning vocabulary: it might be just a question of keeping a notebook, or using
a dictionary properly or perhaps disciplining yourself to look over your notes or
to read a lot outside of class. The more independent you become as a learner,
the better and stronger your vocabulary becomes, I think. (p. 222)
In addition, Amer (2002) argues that “vocabulary is central to language and of critical
importance to the typical language learner” (p. 1). Bogaards (2001) adds that
“vocabulary knowledge constitutes an essential part of competence in a second or
foreign language” (p. 321). Moreover, Atay and Ozbulgan (2007) discuss that
“development of lexical knowledge occupies an important position in the learners’
struggle to master a second/foreign language” (p. 40). Not only that, learning a second
language has been tied up with acquiring a good amount of the learned language
vocabulary. Regarding this, Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) say that “learning a second
language (L2) involves the learning of large numbers of words” (p. 1). This, learning
words, is very significant to equip the learner with the main tool to convey their
verbal massages in a second language (L2).
Vocabulary is the main component for effective communication in the
language of interaction, many researchers and academics agree. Croll (1971) states
that “a full vocabulary is essential to adequate self expression” (p. 378). Furthermore,
Jarvis and Stephens (1994) maintain that “one of the most obvious linguistic factors
affecting communicative effectiveness is vocabulary” (p. 2). Moreover, Ediger (1999)
6
argues that “conversations carried on with other persons require a rich vocabulary” (p.
1). There is no doubt that many of those who learn a second language have been in
situations in which they found themselves helpless for not possessing the right
vocabulary to verbalize what they wanted to say. A number of them are surely very
competent in utilizing grammatical rules, but alas, the empty slots in a well-structured
sentence are not compensated for by the mere application of correct grammatical
rules. Meaning is thoroughly conveyed by the use of the right vocabulary. In contrast,
one can manage in a communicative situation without correct use of grammatical
rules when vocabulary is available. That is not to say that grammar has no role in
effective communication, but it is secondary to the role of vocabulary. Nunan (1999)
supports this argument: “Most of us who live and work in a foreign country, and who
attempt to function in the target language, find that we can get by more readily by
learning vocabulary than grammatical structures” (p.103).
The Insufficiency of Implicit Vocabulary Learning
Vocabulary cannot be learned solely by encountering it in context, necessitates
focusing on it in classrooms. Some scholars argue that learners will acquire
vocabulary through extensive reading about different topics because “they will
encounter a wealth of new words and their vocabularies will grow naturally, without
direct teaching” (Coomber, Peet, & Carl, 1998, p.12). However, this is not always the
case, as many L2 learners have noticed that encountering new words in context does
not in itself serve to add these novel words to their vocabulary except when the
learners search for their meanings and try to use them in some way. For example,
Hunt and Beglar (2005) say regarding this point: “Implicit instructional and learning
7
tasks – such as narrow reading …, task cycles that require learners to approach texts
in multiple ways and reading extensively – promote small incremental gains in
vocabulary growth” (p. 28). Additionally, Fuente (2006) claims that “research on the
role of implicit and explicit focus on form indicates that explicit learning conditions
and classroom-based tasks designed to focus learners’ attention on specific forms may
be more effective for FL classrooms” (p. 266). Thus, there is a need for teachers to
engage their students in a variety of methods that make them interact with the words
that first appear in context. In fact, leaving learners to learn new words only through
context could make learners arrive at the wrong meanings for those words. Coomber,
Peet, and Carl (1998) explain that “without teacher instruction, context clues might
actually mislead learners as they deal with some of the most important words in a
passage” (p. 12). Moreover, Hunt and Beglar (2005) claim that “successfully inferring
vocabulary from context is problematic for a variety of reasons” (p. 27). One of them,
as they clarify, is that learners need to know not less than 98% of the words that could
give clues to guess the meaning of new words from context in a certain text. For weak
learners, this may lead to the “beginners’ paradox” which is “a vicious cycle in which
limited lexical knowledge discourages reading and, simultaneously, a lack of reading
restricts vocabulary growth” (Hunt & Beglar, 2005, p. 27). A second reason for not
only dealing with words in context is that the ability to memorize words is improved
when learners look at words out of their context and deal more deeply with their
different facets (Hunt & Beglar, 2005). A third reason is that contexts with scarce
clues, more than one reasonable guess, illusory simplicity, numerous definitions , and
unsuccessful use of morphological and syntactic hints “can lead to partially or fully
incorrect inferences and attributes, which can require years to unlearn” (Hunt &
8
Beglar, 2005, p. 27). So, context by itself, as a form of introducing vocabulary
implicitly, is not enough to guarantee learners’ acquisition of vocabulary. This why
Hunt and Beglar (2005) recommend explicit vocabulary teaching and learning:
First, SLVA [Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition] research shows that
the explicit temporary study of decontextualized vocabulary is valuable in the
EFL reading classroom and early studies of decontextualized vocabulary
learning…have been replicated by a variety of contemporary researchers and
the results have consistently shown explicit learning to be effective. First
language (L1) research undertaken in the US from the late 1960s to the 1980s
(e.g., Anderson, Heibert, Scott, and Wilkinson, 1985; Chall, 1967; Perfetti,
1985) confirmed that “…an early and explicit emphasis on the medium (on
word recognition and decoding) was more effective for reading
comprehension as well” (Chall, 1987: 10). In addition, programs that
incorporate direct vocabulary instruction have been found to be more effective
for vocabulary development than those that rely exclusively on indirect means.
(p.27)
Having presented those points, Hunt and Beglar (2005) reached a consensus, which I
advocate, “that the most efficient learning involves a carefully selected combination
of both explicit and implicit instruction and learning” (p. 28).
Relation of Vocabulary to other Language Skills
A good base of vocabulary can enhance learners’ performance in the main
skills of a language. Carl (2003a) states, “Research indicates that in order for the
students to perform well in speaking, reading, and writing they need to possess a rich
9
vocabulary” (p. 3). This is quite intuitive. When a person knows the vocabulary
associated with a certain topic, it becomes obvious how this person outperforms
others in the activities that are related to that topic. In contrast, when he/she
encounters many unfamiliar words in a certain context, whether the words are low or
high frequency words, the meanings of these words become obscured, and it is safe to
assume that he/she will have a difficult time trying to understand what is going on.
Nation (1990) elaborates that “learners feel that many of their difficulties in both
receptive and productive language use result from an inadequate vocabulary” (p. 2).
When L2 learners read a text that contains a number of familiar vocabulary
items, it becomes easy for the learners to understand the gist of the text even if they
do not know all the words. When learners do not know many words in the text,
however, they often find themselves confused and frustrated regardless of their
competence in other aspects of the language. Regarding the effect of vocabulary on
reading, Bromley (2007) declares that “fluent readers recognize and understand many
words, and they read more quickly and easily than those with smaller vocabularies”
(p. 528). Ediger (1999) states that “one reason that pupils do not read well is that they
do not possess a functional vocabulary for reading” (p. 1). This reason is one of the
eight reasons which Ediger (1999) suggests in his article as to why learners develop
their vocabulary. He strongly advises language teachers to engage their students in
activities that serve to develop their vocabulary.
The effect of vocabulary is most obvious in writing and speaking skills. The
richer vocabulary we have, the more we find ourselves able to express what we want
to say in a way that impresses our readers and listeners. This can be inferred from
what Ediger (1999) claims: “Variety in selecting words to convey accurate meanings
10
is necessary in speaking and writing, the outages of the language arts, and use of
diverse terms and concepts in speaking and writing adds variety to quality
communication" (p. 1). Shedding light on the same point, Ratcliff (1994) argues that
“they [writers] should use words that their audience understands and that are
appropriate to the rhetorical problem” (p. 24). Of course, choosing the most suitable
words to express an idea serves to convey the message with more ease and more
accuracy. In addition, regarding the effect of vocabulary on writing, Carl (2003b)
believes that “as writing is heavily dependent upon an author’s ability to draw upon
words to describe an event, vocabulary development must be taken seriously in the
classroom” (p. 4).
Thus, the work of writers becomes much easier when they possess a portion of
vocabulary that suffices to convey the meaning they want to express. Engber (1995)
further clarifies, “While less-skilled writers were as concerned as skilled writers with
getting their ideas down on paper, they were hampered by a lack of language,
particularly vocabulary” (p. 140). This is one of the facets that Engber (1995)
discusses regarding the effect of vocabulary on writing in a paper in which he
examined the role of the lexical component in the scoring of sixty-six placement tests.
He found that “error-free variations [using a variety of lexical resources]” are
congruent with scores. So, if we, as ESL teachers, want to help our students to make
good progress in their writing abilities, we should give vocabulary more attention in
our classes. This is explicitly stated by Lee and Muncie (2006): “Focusing on
vocabulary prior to writing significantly improved the production of higher level
recognition vocabulary as well as impressive use of newly learned higher level
vocabulary” (p. 296).
11
These studies indicate that vocabulary has a significant role in ESL classes, of
which ESL teachers must be aware. Foil and Alber (2002) maintain that “with the
recent focus in applied linguistics on lexical competence, and the impact this has had
on language teaching, many language teachers are now aware of the necessity of
making vocabulary a central part of their teaching practice” (p. 380). What seems to
be a good sign is that a lot of language learners are sensitive to the value of learning
vocabulary since it has been noticed that they use more approaches to deal with
vocabulary than for other linguistic areas (Fan, 2003).
Techniques of Vocabulary Instruction
Many researchers have examined the effect of vocabulary learning techniques
in order to find out those that better serve to develop L2 learners’ vocabulary. One of
these techniques that has been found to be very effective in this area is the translation
technique despite the many arguments which have been raised against its use. Nation
argues that “learning of vocabulary is faster for many learners if the meaning of the
word is given through an L1 translation first” (as cited in Folse, 2004, p. 66).
Moreover, in a study conducted by Grace (1998) on 181 native speakers of English
studying beginner French, the researcher divided the participants into two groups: a
group enrolled in a CALL (computer assisted language learning) program in French
with the opportunity of using English translations and a group using a CALL program
in French without translations in English. The researcher found that learners who had
the option of using translations gained 42 percent more new words than those who did
not. Furthermore, Luppescu and Day (1993) reported that “the Japanese learners who
used bilingual dictionaries scored higher on a vocabulary posttest than the students
12
who did not” (as cited in Fan, 2003, p. 224). Knight (1994) also reported that
“students with access to a computerized dictionary demonstrated more vocabulary
knowledge after reading than those without” (as cited in Fan, 2003, p. 224).
These points indicate the important role of the translation technique in
developing L2 learners’ vocabulary, which is something I believe in to a great extent
due to my own experiences as an ESL learner. I will never forget the long hours I
spent writing the new words I encountered in different English learning activities
along with their translations in a notebook with the purpose of transferring them to my
long-term memory. Each word, I wrote more than twenty times. This is what I think
served the deep processing of new knowledge which Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) refer
to when they say, “The chance that some piece of new information will be stored in
long-term memory is not determined by the length of time that it is held in short-term
memory but rather by the shallowness or depth with which it is initially processed” (p.
5). Therefore, broadening the knowledge kept in long-term memory should be taken
into consideration since it could facilitate acquiring other knowledge in later stages.
Reagarding this, Fan (2003) claims that “the information from long-term memory can
be used to enrich the learner’s understanding or retention of the new ideas by
providing related information or schemata into which the new ideas can be organized”
(p. 223). However, it should be kept in mind that research, so far, has proven that the
translation technique is most effective with beginner-level L2 learners, so its
effectiveness with higher levels still needs to be tested. Folse (2004) confirms:
“Research should now move to more pertinent questions, such as whether the value of
L1 translation is as effective for higher-proficiency students as it is for lower-
proficiency students” (p.68).
13
However, knowing the meaning of a word is not enough to learn the different
shades of meaning that a word may have, and here emerges the role of the context
technique. Carl (2003b) says regarding the role of context in learning a new word:
We can learn much about a word’s meaning through different contexts in
which it is used. And the more different contexts we encounter with that word,
the more flexible we become with that word and its meaning and the more
likely it is that we will remember it. (p. 2)
Other researchers and educators as well stress the importance of context in acquiring
new words. For example, in a classroom guide for reading teachers, the authors of
Reading Comprehension Instruction in Grades 4 - 8 maintain that “context is crucial
in helping children learn and understand new words” (North Central Regional
Educational Lab, 2002, p. 7). That is, learning vocabulary in the “abstract” can be a
waste of learners’ time if it leads them to formulating a wrong perception or
understanding of a word. Thus, it might be deduced that making use of both
translation and context techniques together in learning new words has a deeper impact
on developing L2 vocabulary rather than using each one in isolation from the other. A
recent guide for implementing effective reading programs states that “several studies
indicate that a blend of a direct-definition instruction, and vocabulary learning
through context clues is more effective than one-method alone” (Literacy
Coordinators Office of Reading/Language Arts, 2003, p. 20). It is important to note
here the notion that translation is one form of a definition as Nation (2001) says,
“First language translations are probably the simplest kind of definition in that they
are short and draw directly on familiar experience” (p. 66).
14
Application of the context technique, of course, may take different forms like
asking learners to use context to guess the meaning of words, and giving learners
sentences with blank spaces that should be filled according to the context. Here,
however, I am specifically referring to another form of context which provides the
necessary repetitions of newly learned words to transfer them to long-term memory.
Repetition is a recycling process that is essential to deepen understanding of words.
Richards (2000) explains, “If recycling is neglected, many partially known words will
be forgotten, wasting all the effort already put into learning them” (p. 137). This kind
of context can be provided for L2 students by engaging them in different types of
readings in and out of class.
Another technique that has been found to have a considerable role in
increasing L2 learners’ vocabulary and that has been widely discussed in the literature
is the keyword technique. The keyword technique is “a mnemonic strategy for
elaborating upon an unfamiliar word or concept by making it more meaningful and
concrete” (Foil & Alber, 2002, p. 135). For instance, a learner might recall that
“muck” means filth by rhyming it with “yuck.” Regarding its effectiveness, Foil and
Alber (2002) state that “students experience increased levels of academic success
when teachers implement the Keyword Method [and this] has been well documented”
(p. 135). Furthermore, Nation (1990) argues that “the keyword technique is an
effective way of doing this [remembering a new word]” (p. 166). In addition, Hunt
and Beglar (2005) point out that “it [the Keyword Method] may be most efficiently
applied to consolidating words that have proven difficult to learn by other
approaches” (p. 32). Fan (2003) adds, “This strategy [the Keyword Method], which
associates the meaning, sound, and image of the L1 and L2, has been found to
15
improve retention” (p. 224). To add to that, Sagarra and Alba (2006), in their study of
three methods of learning vocabulary, examined the effectiveness of rote
memorization, semantic mapping, and the keyword technique among 778 beginner L2
learners. They concluded that the use of the keyword technique to introduce
vocabulary results in better L2 vocabulary learning at initial stages of acquisition.
Thus, it might be inferred from the studies discussed above that the keyword method
is very useful in teaching vocabulary although its implementation can consume a lot
of time and effort.
A further technique for developing word knowledge is Word Links which is
based on the characteristics of effective vocabulary instruction. That is, it engages
learners in multifaceted activities. Yopp, Brigman, Wood, and Fink (2007) claim that:
Word links offer students myriad opportunities to think and talk about the
contexts in which words are used, to revisit words that they have been
learning, to think about relationships among words as they connect with
classmates, and to actively engage with words as they decide whether or not to
link with peers who have different words. (p. 1)
The idea behind the Word Links method is as follows. After having introduced a list
of chosen vocabulary items from a unit by providing simple definitions or
instructional contexts, the teacher distributes cards with the words written on them to
the students, one for each. The students’ task is to walk around the classroom and find
a partner whose word is related to theirs in some way. Then, the partners have to
explain how their words are related. Likewise, this type of strategy provides students
with the opportunity to think about and discuss the meanings of words with their
partners as they are trying to find relations between the words which makes it a very
16
useful experience. “Reviewing the words in this way usually results in rich
conversations about the meanings of the words and is a motivating and interesting
experience for the students” (p. 1), as Yopp, Brigman, Wood, and Fink (2007),
explain.
In addition to these techniques is semantic mapping. It presents words in a
diagram that shows their relations with other words and has been remarkably
beneficial in helping learners to acquire new words. One form of semantic mapping is
to ask learners to write a newly introduced word in the middle of a paper and then
lead them through answering three questions that could give details about the word. In
another form the teacher writes a category on the board and asks learners to yell out
all the words that fit in the category (Foil & Alber, 2002). This serves to connect
between prior knowledge and new knowledge, which strengthens learner’s acquisition
of significant words.
Regardless of which vocabulary teaching techniques are adopted, there are
four characteristics for effective vocabulary teaching which a number of researchers
agree should be taken into consideration:
• The vocabulary teaching method exposes learners to contextual use
besides the definition of the items under focus (Foil & Alber, 2002; Stahl,
1999; Tennenbaum, Torgesen, & Wagner, 2006; Yopp, Brigman, Wood,
& Fink, 2007).
• It subsequently retrieves the items under focus and gives the learners the
opportunity to apply and practice the words (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2006,
Foil & Alber, 2002; NICHD 2000; Yopp, Brigman, Wood, & Fink, 2007).
17
• It pushes the learners to figure out associations among word meanings
(Blachowicz & Fisher, 2006, Foil & Alber, 2002; NICHD 2000; Yopp,
Brigman, Wood, & Fink, 2007).
• It engages the learners in dynamic learning activities (Beck, McKeown &
Kucan, 2002; Foil & Alber., 2002; Kamil & Hiebert, 2005; NICHD 2000;
Yopp, Brigman, Wood, & Fink, 2007).
In addition, Atay and Ozbulgan (2007) assert that:
In deciding which vocabulary learning strategies to recommend to L2 learners,
one needs to consider the specific learning context as the effectiveness with
which learning strategies can be both taught and used depends on a number of
variables, i.e., the students’ proficiency level, their motivation and purposes in
learning the L2, the tasks and texts being used. (p. 40)
Conclusion
What I discussed above is considered a small sample of what has been
produced in this area. However, it serves to give an overall view about why
vocabulary is regarded to be a major constituent of a language, according to some
language acquisition scholars. It also served to identify some strategies that are
believed to be effective in the field of teaching and learning vocabulary which will
help me to base my findings about the second question of my study, “Do the
techniques that the selected sample of Omani ESL teachers use in their classrooms
reflect the various methods of teaching vocabulary discussed in the recent literature
on vocabulary instruction?”
18
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
What do ESL teachers in AbdulRahman bin Auff’s School for Basic Education
do to develop their students’ vocabulary? Are teachers aware of the importance of
vocabulary instruction in classrooms? Do teachers in Omani government schools use
external resources to support vocabulary instruction? In order to approach these
questions more closely and to look at them from different angles as recommended in
qualitative research studies by use of triangulation (McDonough & McDonough,
1997), I collected data with the use of three methods: interviews, observations, and
post-observation follow-up interviews. Thus, the study is qualitative in nature.
Moreover, the study being limited to the boundaries of one specific school and the six
language teachers at that school, it is a case study approach, which normally entails a
detailed description of the situation under focus. A case study is “intensive
descriptions and analyses of a single unit or bounded system” (Merriam, 1992, p. 19).
What urged me to base the study on qualitative research is that it is
characterized by reflexivity which is essential especially for research connected to the
field of education (Hammersley, 2000). That is, reflexivity enables researchers to get
a deeper perspective of not only the issue at hand but also of themselves with regard
to this issue. Qualitative research sheds light on “…deeper, richer meanings about
personal, theoretical, and epistemological aspects of the research question”
(Kleinasser, 2000, p. 155). Moreover, qualitative research stresses the idea of
providing comprehensive and detailed descriptions of the different features included
in a study. The availability of such descriptions in my research will make it feasible
19
for other EFL teachers, specifically in Omani government schools, to draw on their
own teaching situations and reflect on what they have in common with the EFL
teacher participants in the study. This could help them better avail themselves of the
results once they have established such commonalities (Heinecke & Stohl Drier,
1998).
Context
The context in which I conducted the study is the school at which I am
teaching, which is an all-male government school in Oman. The school is a one-floor
building built about twenty years ago, but renovated a number of times. Although it is
a one-floor building, it consists of thirty rooms, two learning resource centers, four
administration offices, a first-aid room, an art hall, two staff rooms, two assembly
grounds and two stores. The faculty, all males, includes seventy-two teachers who,
depending on their major, teach social sciences, math, Arabic, Islamic studies, arts,
English, and science subjects. They teach these subjects to one thousand students in
grades 5-10.
Most classrooms contain up to thirty three tables, so they are pretty crowded.
From grade 5-8 the tables are organized in groups of six or seven tables depending on
the number of the students in each class, but from grade 9-10 the tables are organized
in five rows, just like the old system. There are two boards; one is the whiteboard, of
course, and the other is the notice board on the back wall. The classrooms are not
equipped by an overhead projector, a VCR or a TV to show videos. However, the
teachers could book the overhead and the TV projector before the lesson, or they
could book one of the learning resource centers in order to use the VCR, or to give the
20
students read some of the available books. Of course, booking is always faced by the
problem of clashes with other classes which makes the use of technology secondary to
other traditional methods.
The curriculum provided by the Omani Ministry of Education to teach English,
just to give an overview since it the focus of the study, contains exercises which a
number of them presents more than 10 new words at a time, and that are mostly out of
context and not recycled in later exercises. For example, figure 1 shows a vocabulary
exercise from the text book for grade 6 which introduces 17 new words. Students are
supposed to understand the meaning of the words from the pictures, and then listen to
the tape and order the pictures accordingly. These words are not recycled or reviewed
in later exercises. Another example is from grade 10 text book which introduces 6
new words using mere English definitions as figure 2 shows. These words also are not
recycled or introduced in another way.
21
Figure 1. A Vocabulary Exercise from Grade 6
22
Figure 2. A Vocabulary Exercise from Grade 10 Text Book
Participants
The participants whom my study included are all six teachers who teach EFL
at AbdulRahman bin Auff’s School for Basic Education. Thus, the only criterion for
the selection of participants was that they belonged to the group of EFL teachers at
the case study school. As I am also a member of this group, the six participants who
23
met the criterion are my friends. This reduced the tension that usually accompanies
interviews and observations and motivated participants to express themselves more
freely and to behave in their classrooms in a normal way. The section entitled, Role of
the Researcher below, addresses some questions and concerns that may arise
regarding having friends serve as participants in a research study.
Before interviewing the participants, I spoke to the six teachers mentioned
above in order to make sure that they do not mind participating in the study. All of
them showed interest and willingness to participate in the study. These teachers, who
are all Omanis, have different experiences, and, no doubt, different styles of teaching.
They are, also, teaching different grades. Because the teachers preferred that they
remain anonymous, I gave them pseudonyms. Daoud has fourteen years of EFL
teaching experience and teaches grades eight and nine at the school. Rashid has five
years of experience and teaches grades nine and ten. Younis has three years of
experience and teaches grades six and ten. Mazin has also three years of experience,
but he teaches grades six and seven. Othman has two years of experience and teaches
grades five and ten. Ali has only one year of experience and teaches grades five and
six. All of these teachers have a bachelor’s degree in English teaching from Sultan
Qaboos University (SQU) in Oman except Daoud who has fourteen years of
experience, and who received a degree from a higher institute in Oman, but he has
recently acquired his bachelor’s degree from Leeds University in the UK. (See Table
1 below for a summary of information about the six participants.)
24
Table1: ESL Teacher Participants.
Teacher Years of ESL Teaching Experience
Grades Taught Age Qualifications
Daoud 14 8 + 9 36 BA from Leeds University
Rashid 5 9 + 10 28 BA from SQU
Younis 3 6 + 10 26 BA from SQU
Mazin 3 6 + 7 26 BA from SQU
Othman 2 5 + 10 25 BA from SQU
Ali 1 5 + 6 24 BA from SQU
What follows is a detailed description of the procedures that I followed to
gather data through the three collection methods mentioned above.
Role of the Researcher
As mentioned above, the participants in this research study are ESL teachers
teaching at AbdulRahman bin Auff School with whom I have established friendships.
This may raise concerns for some in terms of the validity of the data collection
methods since the participants in the study are also friends of the researcher.
Therefore, in this section I address these concerns by clarifying the importance of
rapport and reciprocity in qualitative research studies and how my relationship with
the participants can and does, in fact, serve to increase the validity and trustworthiness
of the research.
Many qualitative researchers have stressed the value of achieving rapport with
participants in research studies, especially when interviewing is the primary method
of data collection (Burns & Grove, 1993; Nieswiadomy, 1994). Berg (2001) explains,
“One dominant theme in the literature on interviewing centers on the interviewer’s
25
ability to develop rapport with an interview subject” (p. 86). This stems from the
principle that the better researchers know their participants, the more prepared they
are to help respondents to relax during interviews and to openly share their
perceptions, ideas or opinions about the issue at hand. This includes knowing, for
example, participants’ customs, interests, and values. Researcher-participant rapport is
reinforced when participants know the researcher, have dealt with him/her in some
way, and understand the aim of the research and how it could benefit all parties
involved (Berg, 2001). Moreover, Alvesson and Sköldberg (2000) argue that in order
for qualitative research interviews to be deemed effective, honest, and ethical, the
establishment of rapport between interviewers and interviewees is essential. Rapport
can be achieved by extending ample reciprocity which is very important in qualitative
research and during interviews as qualitative research interviews are participatory and
intimate in nature (Weiss, 1994). However, many qualitative researchers find it
difficult to ascertain whether or not they are able to adequately reciprocate. As
Glesne (1999) explains:
As research participants willingly open up their lives to researchers- giving
time, sharing intimate stories, and frequently including them in both public
and private events and activities– researchers become ambivalent,
alternatively overjoyed with the data they are gathering, but worried by their
perceived inability to adequately reciprocate. (p.126)
Although I did not compensate my participants monetarily for the time that
they contributed to this study, I know that I will have many opportunities to
reciprocate in the future, as the participants and I often help each other, particularly at
work.
26
Furthermore, some qualitative researchers recommend matching researchers
(or interviewers) to respondents (or interviewees) on such factors as gender, race,
class, and ethnicity (Weiss, 1994). Participants are more likely to consider the
researcher to be an “insider” rather than an outsider (and are thus more willing to
reveal and share information) when they match the researcher on one or more
attribute (Weiss, 1994). As I share many attributes with my participants, such as
gender, class, age, nationality, and occupation. I believe that I met one of the valuable
requisites for establishing and maintaining rapport with interviewees. Thus, by having
selected participants with whom I have already established good rapport, I addressed
the above concerns and overcame some of the hurdles that many researchers involved
in qualitative research face. I also strived to clarify to the participants that their honest
responses would help me to arrive at conclusions that would potentially serve all of us
as EFL teachers at AbdulRahman bin Auff School. A further thing that I did to insure
that the participants expressed their ideas without any intervention is that I did not say
anything which could give a clue about my own beliefs during the interviews. In fact,
none of the main questions, at least, in the interview guides, pushes the interviewees
to quote the interviewers’ beliefs, if they actually have come to know them by any
chance, or those of the other participants, which gives their responses more
credibility.
Procedures
Interviews
I chose this method of data collection because conducting one-on-one
interviews would require the researcher to be directly involved in the process of data
27
gathering, which enabled me to attend closely to the responses of the interviewees,
both verbal and non-verbal as recommended by Seidman (1998). This, in itself, gave
me the opportunity to reach a deeper perspective about the issue under focus through
reordering and reformulating interview questions according to the initial responses of
interviewees, while, at the same time, taking into account the different context and
circumstances of each interview (Herod, 1993).
In the initial interviewing phase, I interviewed one teacher every other day
over a period of two weeks. I left it to the teachers to choose the place and time in
which they liked to be interviewed. This was determined a few days before each
interview. Each interview lasted 45 minutes to 1 hour which was within the time limit
suggested by Seidman (1998) for conducting interviews in qualitative research
studies. Although my native language and the native language of the participants is
Arabic, we agreed to use the English language in the interviews because we, most of
the time, use English when we meet to discuss something about English as a subject
in the school. The interviewed teachers were asked seven major questions. Each of
those questions had sub-questions depending on the answers of the interviewees. The
teachers were given a copy of these questions in advance, so that they had a chance to
think about the questions and perhaps start to recall some of their experiences and
practices in teaching vocabulary (see Appendix A for initial interview questions).
With regard to the post-observations follow-up interviews phase, I followed the
same procedure which I used with the initial interviews explained above. Follow-up
interviews took place after classroom observations (described below) had been
completed. During follow-up interviews, I asked the interviewees questions to clarify
points that they made in the initial interviews and asked them about things I had
28
observed in their classrooms (see Appendix B for some of the follow-up interview
questions).
The interviews, whether initial or follow-up interviews, were tape-recorded so
that the maximum amount of useful data could be obtained from them after
transcribing the interviews. This was feasible since I transcribed each recorded-
interview the day after the interview, which ensured that the actual interview was still
fresh in my mind. This implies that the analysis of the collected data was instant and
continuous, which helped me to avoid being overwhelmed by accumulated data which
could have resulted in a less accurate analysis. In each transcribed interview, I tried to
find systematic patterns on which I based my analysis and that I could use to compare
the responses of the teachers involved in the study. These patterns were identified
using the constant comparative method of data analysis (Merriam, 1992). The
comparison of the derived patterns enabled me to find out how these teachers
generally dealt with vocabulary in their classes. This was compared with the data
collected by the other methods of data collection at a later point of analysis, in order
to attain more credibility and accurateness as Guba and Lincolin (1982) suggest.
Observations
In the observation phase, I observed each of the six teachers three times over a
period of six weeks. The time lapse between the observations of each teacher was two
weeks, so that the teacher whom I observed on Saturday of the first week was
observed again on Saturday of the third week, and so on. Since there were six teachers
whom I needed to observe each week of observation (week 1, week 3, and week 6 of
the observation period) I had to do two observations in one of the five working days
29
of those weeks. I wrote a reflection for each observation within twenty-four hours
from the end of the observations, as recommended by Merriam (1992). Writing
reflections helped me to keep more details of how teachers went over explaining
vocabulary in their lessons. For instance, while analyzing the gathered data, these
details were useful in noting anything special or different about the way in which
teachers used the same technique, which I believe resulted in a more accurate analysis
of the collected data.
While observing, I noted the type of techniques that the teachers used to teach
vocabulary and the number of times these techniques were used, without intervening
by any means in the teaching materials or the style of the teachers. I was also looking
at the kinds of words taught and the purpose of teaching them. For example, were new
words taught for the purpose of expanding vocabulary or clarifying a point? The
collected data via observations was compared with what has been found in recent
studies as the most useful methods in teaching vocabulary. This analysis also revealed
whether the participating government school teachers have in mind constructing a
strong vocabulary base for their students when they teach vocabulary or whether they
just introduce vocabulary to get through the materials they have to teach. In order to
collect data related to what I was investigating, I included all of those aspects,
techniques used, kinds of words, and the purpose of teaching the words, in the
observation sheet that I designed specifically for this purpose (see sample observation
sheet in Appendix C).
To identify patterns in the decisions made by the participating teachers with
regard to (1) the vocabulary teaching techniques they adopt in class, (2) the types of
new vocabulary items they choose to teach, and (3) the purposes behind teaching
30
chosen words, was the main tool that I used in analyzing the data gathered from
observations. The following diagram represents the timeline of the data collection
period.
Figure 3. The Data Collection Timeline
Week 1 & 2 Week 3 Week4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 & 9 Jan 12th 2008 Jan 26th 2008 Feb 2th 2007 Feb 9th 2008 Feb 16th 2008 Feb 23th 2008 Mar 1rt 2008 Initial Interviews Observation 1 Break Observation 2 Break Observation 3 Follow-up Interviews
The data collected from the combination of interviews and observations
provided me with a wealth of data to analyze in order to answer my research
questions.
31
CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Introduction
What techniques each teacher uses should reflect the teacher’s philosophy and
awareness of how to best avail themselves of the most recent techniques in class.
Thus, I start this section by shedding light on the participating teachers’ philosophies
regarding the role of vocabulary. Then, I describe the reported vocabulary teaching
techniques which the teachers claimed to use during interviews. I then give a
description of the observed techniques that the participating teachers appeared to
employ in their classrooms. Next, I clarify some discrepancies between reported and
observed techniques and the reasons that the teachers gave as explanations for their
occurrence, thus answering my first research question. I after that compare between
the vocabulary teaching style of the participating teachers as it appears through
analyzing the collected data, and what has been declared to be the most useful
vocabulary teaching methods according to recent literature, thus answering my second
research question.
Participants’ Views of Vocabulary
All of the participants1 asserted that vocabulary is at the core of language
instruction in their philosophy of teaching. They argued that the acquisition of a good
amount of vocabulary helps students to develop all of the language skills: listening,
reading, writing, and speaking. For instance, Rashid affirmed that “it [vocabulary] is
1 The participants’ words have not been edited
32
very important for contributing for the other skills. For example, the students can
write [a] better piece of writing if they know more words and, of course, they can read
quickly and understand a reading text or passage if they have more vocabulary.”
Abdullah stated that “it [vocabulary] is more important than other things because
students have to start collecting vocabulary to start understanding English…” Mazin
claimed that “vocabulary is a very important aspect of English … because if pupils
know a lot of vocabulary, they can understand what they read and hear, and then write
and speak.”
Moreover, the acquisition of a good amount of vocabulary moves students
from the stage of dealing with the language in pieces to the stage of dealing with it as
a whole which contributes to enhancing their language production. All of this results
in improving the academic performance of the students, as the participants’ responses
to the question “How do you think that vocabulary affects the improvement of your
students’ English level?” seem to imply. For example, Mazin said, “I have a student
in my class who knows lots of vocabulary, so when I ask any questions, he answers
most of them and he always tries to participate. This clearly affects his level.” These
factors urge the participants to give vocabulary priority in their philosophy of teaching
as is clear from their responses. This emphasis given to vocabulary in EFL teaching
by the participants is congruent with the prominence given to it by many researchers
as discussed in the literature review. In spite of this, the weight given by the
participants to vocabulary in their teaching philosophy, they all reached a consensus
regarding the general weakness of their students’ vocabulary knowledge.
This, students’ weakness, is apparent through analyzing the participating
teachers’ responses to the question in the initial interview which elicited responses
33
about teachers’ beliefs about their students’ vocabulary. All of the teachers mentioned
something about the general weakness of their students’ vocabulary level despite the
effort which they thought that they have put into teaching vocabulary. Some of the
responses were:
Othman: They [the students] are weak; whatever you do for them,
whatever you teach, whatever you say for them to review the
words.
Rashid: You can say, through my experience, that they are poor.
Daoud: Maybe 2 or 3 are good in remembering and using vocabulary.
Some of them are average, and the rest are weak.
Mazin: In each class, you have one or two students who have a good
amount of vocabulary, the rest are very weak.
Some of the teachers attributed the weakness of their students to the students’
negative attitude towards the English language which stands, as they claim, as a great
barrier to their acquisition of the language. Ali said, “I think that they are not
interested in English because it is difficult for them and it is not their first language.”
Other teachers attributed the weakness to the length of the syllabus which restrains
them from setting an appropriate plan to develop students’ vocabulary. Regarding this
point, Mazin maintained that “our students don’t have a good base in vocabulary; this
is because of the syllabus.” These reasons could be part of the problem; however, the
teachers did not seem to realize that the problem behind the low level of the students’
vocabulary could also stem from their style of teaching, what techniques they use and
how they use them. None of the participating teachers mentioned or even entertained
the thought that the students’ inability to grasp new vocabulary items may be partially
34
an outcome of the vocabulary teaching approaches used in the classroom, as it will be
obvious from the following analysis.
Reported and Observed Methods of Vocabulary Instruction
In response to the initial interview question regarding the way in which the
participants teach vocabulary, each participant, as expected, had something different
to say. As explained above, three observations of each participant’s class were
completed in order to compare what the teachers reported doing in their classrooms to
teach vocabulary and what they actually do during class time. Mismatches (or
discrepancies) between reported methods of instruction and observed methods of
instruction are discussed below thus answering the research question: What are the
vocabulary teaching techniques which a selected sample of ESL teachers in
AbdulRahman bin Auff for Basic Education School, an Omani government school,
use in their classrooms?
To begin with, Daoud said that he normally writes the words that he wants to
explain on the board to direct students’ attention to those words. Then, he tries to
explain them by giving examples and miming words that can be mimed. If the words
are difficult and the students show no signs of understanding, he provides them with
the meaning in Arabic. In other words, for Daoud, the last resort is translating the new
vocabulary word into Arabic. This, according to him, saves time. The three
observations of Daoud’s class showed a sequence in using vocabulary techniques that
is somewhat in keeping with the sequence which he described in the interview. For
example, to explain the word “excited,” he first wrote it on the board and read it out
loud. When no student appeared to know its meaning, he mimed it, and that’s when
35
the students managed to guess its meaning. It was obvious that the students had
grasped the meaning of the word because most of them raised their hands, and some
of them were already yelling out the answer. However, one discrepancy between what
he reported doing and what he actually did was that he did not use any of the taught
words -even the ones being reviewed- once in sentences as he implied. Moreover, he
used the translation technique often. Either he himself translated the words or asked
students to translate for others, right from the beginning. The translation technique
was used by Dauod as the first method of teaching about half of the words that were
taught during the three observed classes. Among these translated words were
“replied,” “demand,” and “enquire”.
Younis’s response to the same question showed that he believes that he uses
the same methods that Daoud reported using following the same sequence. However,
in practice, this sequence rarely appeared while Younis was teaching. He used it only
with two of the thirty-six words which he taught in the three observed classes. The
prevailing technique in his style of teaching vocabulary was the translation technique.
He used it right from the beginning to explain sixteen words, including “announced,”
“advised,” and “shouted.” He also used it as a last resort to explain three words only:
“nose stud,” “brooch,” and “whispered,” which he previously tried to explain by
miming and defining them in English. All of the other words, i.e. “bracelets,”
“necklace,” and “earrings,” were taught by the use of pictures from the students’
textbook. There was no situation in which he presented any of the taught words in a
useful context, which contradicts what he said during the interview.
Rashid had something different to say. He commented that teaching
vocabulary could take different forms depending on the level of the students. Thus, he
36
explained that when he introduces new vocabulary items to students, he uses vague
vocabulary words in sentences that give clues to their meaning when he deals with
upper-level students. He also reported that he tries to draw students’ attention to the
position of the vocabulary word under focus within the sentence as another hint to
help students figure out its meaning. With lower-level students, he said that he uses
techniques that are different from those mentioned above. He explained that with
these students, he makes use of miming, illustration, visual stimulus cards, and
finally, the translation technique as the last resort if students are still unable to
comprehend the meaning of the new words. However, through observing his class, it
appeared that using context to help students to guess the meaning of new words was a
very rare occurrence in his class; it did not seem to be a priority. He only used it to
explain two of the twenty-eight words which he taught during the three observed
classes. One of them was the word “tomb” which he embedded in the sentence:
“Sometimes Salim goes to visit his father’s tomb who died two years ago” and the
other word was “ancient” which was embedded in “This house is very ancient. It tells
us a lot about the ninth century which is the time in which it was built.” For the first
word, three students only raised their hand to volunteer the meaning of the word, but
for the second, the teacher had to give the meaning in Arabic after a few trials had
been given attempts by the students to translate the word.
Thus, the technique of vocabulary instruction that Rashid was observed to use
the most was the translation method which he used right away with no differentiation
between new or reviewed words, and between upper-level and lower-level students.
Furthermore, his use of the translation technique took different forms, such as teacher
translations, students translating to each other, and directing students to their English-
37
Arabic glossaries. For example, he translated the word “archeologist,” asked students
who knew the meaning of “pharaoh” to translate it to others in class, and directed
students to look up words like “valley,” “coffin,” and “mask” in the glossary.
Nonetheless, there were some occasions during which he defined words in the target
language and other occasions when he used miming, drawing, and visual stimulus
cards. Some of the words that were taught using these methods include “limp,”
“hook,” “harbor,” and “jetty.”
Moving to another teacher, Mazin reported that when he introduces new
vocabulary items to his students, he relies on miming, book pictures, and flash cards
in order to teach concrete words and he resorts to the translation technique when
teaching abstract words which are difficult for students to understand through context.
The classes observed did not show that Mazin keeps in mind whether a new
vocabulary item is a concrete or abstract word when choosing the appropriate
vocabulary teaching technique to employ. For example, he used the translation
technique right from the beginning to explain the words “factual” and “leaflet.” He
could have used the context technique to explain “factual” and realia or pictures to
explain “leaflet,” which would have been more in keeping with his reported methods
of instruction for abstract versus concrete words. The other techniques that he
mentioned using during the interview matched those that he used during the observed
classes. Among those is the context technique which he used to review two words at
the beginning of the first observed class: the first was the word “interesting,” which
was reviewed in the sentence: “I watched a very interesting movie, I enjoyed it very
much” and the word “horrible” which he used in the sentence: “Two people died in
the car accident which was on the news last night, it was very horrible.” He also used
38
flash cards to explain the words: “rectangular” and “triangle.” The students appeared
to comprehend the meanings of these words and did not need to have them translated
into Arabic by the teacher as they were able to say the meaning in Arabic.
Moreover, Othman asserted that the main technique that he uses in explaining
new words is miming. If students were not able to get the meaning through miming,
he provides contextualized examples using the new words to clarify their meaning.
Much like the other participating teachers, Othman also claimed that he makes use of
the translation technique when students cannot get the meaning of the new words
from other methods of instruction. The observations of Othman’s classes, however,
showed that he used the translation technique intensively to explain most of the words
which he taught, and there were no occasions in which he embedded new words in
meaningful sentences from which students can guess their meanings. Some of the
translated words in this teacher’s classes were “van,” “traffic jam,” “bundle,” and
“envelope.”
Considering Ali’s response to the initial interview question about the ways in
which he teaches vocabulary, he said that he uses context first to explain new words.
Then, he uses one of the following: book pictures, realia, and drawing to help students
to get the meanings of the words under focus. If students are still not able to
understand the new words, he, as the other teachers reported, resorts to the translation
technique. The analysis of the collected data through observations showed that Ali
relied heavily on the translation technique which he used directly to explain twelve
out of the twenty words that he taught during the observed classes. Some of these
words were “chase,” “advice,” “net,” “bite,” and “look down.” There were no
instances in which he used direct translation as the last resort as he mentioned in the
39
initial interview. The other words were taught through the use of miming and book
pictures (as he reported), such as “roar” and “lion,” respectively. The observations
also revealed that Ali did not give examples to provide context to any of the taught
words which does not support what he claimed about his vocabulary teaching style in
the initial interview.
It is apparent that there are some clear discrepancies between the participating
teachers’ perceptions regarding the vocabulary teaching methods they believe they
employ and the observed techniques that they actually use in their EFL classrooms.
To begin with, Daoud, Younis, Othman and Ali all reported that they put new words
in contextualized examples to help students to guess the meanings of the words, but
there were no occasions in which they employed this technique in the observed
classes. What is more is that Younis did not follow the same sequence of teaching
vocabulary that he said that he follows when he teaches vocabulary, and Ali used the
translation technique right from the beginning and not as a last resort as he claimed.
Another teacher, Rashid mentioned that he takes students’ level into consideration
when he chooses which vocabulary technique to use and that the context technique is
the one which he uses the most. However, neither considering students’ level nor
prioritizing the context technique appeared to be part of the methods which the
teacher used in the three observed classes. Lastly, Mazin noted that differentiating
between concrete and abstract words is very crucial when choosing which vocabulary
technique to be employed. This was not apparent in the observed classes as concrete
and abstract words were taught with the same techniques. See Table 2 below for a
summary of the reported and observed techniques.
40
Table2: Reported and Observed Techniques.
Teacher Reported Techniques Observed Techniques Discrepancies
Daoud
- Writes on board - Give examples - Miming - Translation as a last resort
- Write on board - Miming - Translation as the first method
- Give examples - Translation as the first method
Younis
- Writes on board - Give examples - Miming - Translation as a last resort
- Writes on board - Miming - Translation as a last resort - Translation as the first method - Book pictures
- Give examples - Translation as the first method - book pictures
Rashid
- Sentences - Miming - Illustration - Visual stimulus cards - Translation as the last resort
- Sentences (rare) - Translation as the first method - Defining in the target language - Miming - Drawing - Visual stimulus cards
- Translation as the first method - Defining in the target language
Mazin
- Miming - Book pictures - Flash cards - Context - Translation as the last resort
- Translation as the first method - Context - Flash cards - Book pictures
- Translation as the first method
Othman - Miming - Give examples - Translation as the last resort
- Translation as the first method - Miming
- Translation as the first method - Give examples
Ali
- Context - Book pictures - Realia - Drawing - Translation as the last resort
- Translation as the first method - Miming - Book pictures
- Translation as the first method
It is important to note here that the existence of the above mentioned
mismatches does not mean that the various methods mentioned by the participating
teachers are totally neglected in their classrooms. Rather, the discrepancies confirm
41
that the reported techniques are not as integral to the teachers’ vocabulary teaching
style as they claimed. Thus, the questions that come to mind are: what are the possible
explanations of these mismatches between teachers’ perceptions and the reality of
their classrooms? Why do the participating teachers veer away from their vocabulary
teaching philosophies? In order to answer these questions, the participants were asked
during post-observation follow-up interviews to comment on the observed
mismatches. The following section presents these clarifications.
Teachers’ Explanations of the Discrepancies
All of the participating teachers mentioned something about being “stressed”
or “over stressed” when they tried to justify the discrepancies discussed above. Being
in such a state, the participants argued, is what makes the teachers unable to apply
what they think are the most suitable methods for teaching vocabulary. “Stress”
appeared when the teachers talked about the reasons behind the discrepancies, with
the exception of Ali who said that he believes that not enough experience is another
reason behind the mismatches.
The participating teachers attributed their stress to two main reasons. One of
these factors is the restriction which the Omani Ministry of Education imposes on
teachers to use its curriculum as the only resource to teach English. For instance,
regarding this point Othman said, while responding to the question regarding whether
or not the situation in Omani government schools helps teachers to apply their
philosophy of teaching, “We are completely restricted to follow the curriculum; this is
the policy of the ministry.”
In addition, Younis explained that:
42
The obligation of hav[ing] to stick and teach everything in the Ministry’s
curriculum pressurize[s] us. We don’t have a separate class for vocabulary, so
we don’t have the opportunity to only focus on teaching vocabulary. This
make[s] us give the meaning in Arabic most of the time so that we can move
to other things.
Moreover, the teachers discussed how the Ministry of Education sends supervisors to
schools from time to time to check whether they are following the syllabus assigned
or not, and whether or not they are teaching what they are expected to teach according
to a pre-planned schedule. Of course, teachers understand that concentrating on the
assigned materials is very crucial for their students to pass exams, and accordingly,
move to the next grade level. This is very important for every Omani school teacher
because, unfortunately, teachers are judged to be effective or ineffective according to
their students’ results. Thus, one explanation as to why the participating teachers did
not make use of the vocabulary teaching techniques they perceive as the most
effective in their EFL classrooms is that teachers feel that they must rush through
teaching vocabulary in order to cover the Ministry of Education assigned curriculum
to which they are restricted.
The other factor that leads to teachers’ stress is time which appeared to be a
major concern for all of the participants. They explained that the amount of
vocabulary in the curriculum can hardly be covered by the allotted time for each
English course. Not teaching any of those words could hinder students’ understanding
whenever those words reappear in the curriculum. Thus, covering the assigned
materials by the Ministry of Education on time is very important to ensure that
43
students are ready for their EFL exams, especially in secondary school when exams
are prepared and administered by the Ministry of Education, not by the school. This
makes the teachers go over most of the vocabulary rapidly, just to introduce all the
words without being really satisfied as to how well the students acquired them.
Therefore, the teachers cannot do anything about it for the time and the syllabus are
out of their hands. Some examples of teachers’ responses to the post-observation
question: “To what extent do you think that the time given to the syllabus assigned is
enough? Why?” include:
Mazin: Time limits us, so we don’t give them words outside the
curriculum.
Othman: We can’t teach all words thoroughly because of time.
Daoud: Because of the time we have, it’s difficult to finish
sometimes.
Trying to teach under such conditions could over stress any teacher, not only the
participating teachers, and make him/her unable to concentrate. So, another
explanation for the mismatches between what the teachers reported that they do in
class and what they did in the observed classes is the allotted time for their English
courses which is too short to teach all the vocabulary in the curriculum.
Techniques Used vs. Suggested Techniques
The collected data indicates that the teachers used very basic techniques that
only serve to provide the meaning of the words without providing the opportunity to
use them. These techniques are miming, book pictures, realia, flash cards, drawing,
defining in English and the translation technique. All of these techniques are very
useful in introducing the basic meaning of newly taught words, but they do not assure
44
that students develop a good mastery of vocabulary without using another technique
to guarantee that they understand and retain the new vocabulary items in the long run.
For example, a review of literature shows how important it is to use the context
technique to clarify the different shades of meaning after having introduced words
with the translation technique (Literacy Coordinators Office of Reading/Language
Arts, 2003).
The analysis of the data suggests that none of the teachers used context to
further explain any word in later lessons which could imply that the teachers rarely
come back (except in the case of exams) to previously taught words in order to check
whether they have been acquired or not. Almost all of the words that the teachers
taught were explained one time only. It is probable that some teachers use homework
to review and expand acquisition of new words, but none of the participants
mentioned doing so. Regarding this, Nation (2001) says, “We should expect only
limited learning from single meetings with a word and should bear this in mind when
we plan or carry out those meetings” (p. 82). He justified this with the fact that a
number of facets need to be known about a word: its form, its meaning, and its use,
versus learners’ ability to deal with a small portion of information at each exposure.
All of these points do not seem to be taken into consideration by the participants in
this study which implies that their style does not really serve to develop learners’
vocabulary.
Another thing that the collected data indicates is that none of the teachers
seemed to teach their students strategies to learn vocabulary outside class. This is
supported by their responses to the post-observation follow-up interview question
which investigates whether teachers teach their students strategies to learn vocabulary
45
at their own pace or not. All of the teachers said that they do indeed teach their
students such strategies. When I asked them how they did this, the participating
teachers responded that I must have noticed their use of the translation technique,
miming, pictures, realia and drawing during observations. When I explained that I
observed them using these techniques, which is not necessarily the same thing as
overtly teaching students how to use these methods themselves, the participants’
responses indicated that they cannot differentiate between using strategies to teach
vocabulary and teaching strategies for learning vocabulary. Some of their responses
were:
Daoud: I can’t see any difference between using and teaching
techniques … when I use a technique to teach vocabulary, the
student[s] should know how to use it by themselves because I
set an example for them.
Rashid: When we use techniques, we actually teach using them at the
same time, it doesn’t have to be direct.
Younis: I use different techniques to teach vocabulary, so the students
when they see me use a technique a number of times, they
should be able to use it when they need it.
This implies that the way in which the participants teach vocabulary is not
congruent with the current trend in the field of teaching vocabulary, teaching
vocabulary strategies for learner use. Atay and Ozbulgan (2007) argue that “they
[learners] need to be given explicit instruction to become more aware of and
proficient with the broad range of strategies that can be used through the learning
process” (p. 2).
46
A further point that could be deduced from analyzing the results is that the
teachers generally did not consider the difference in students’ English language
proficiency levels as a criterion when choosing vocabulary teaching techniques. All
the teachers used the same techniques to teach vocabulary regardless of the level they
were teaching, even when there was a huge gap between the students’ levels as is the
case with Younis and Othman who teach grades (6 and 10) and grades (5 and 10),
respectively. Nation (2001), distinguishing between lists of translation pairs and
context techniques in terms of learners’ levels of competence says, “While advanced
learners may benefit from learning vocabulary in context, beginning learners probably
benefit the most from words that are presented in lists of translation pairs” (p. 39).
This could bring into question the effectiveness of the participants’ vocabulary
teaching style especially when we know that teachers do not plan what techniques to
use to teach most new words. This was evident in the teachers’ responses to the post-
observation follow-up interview question which elicits whether participating teachers
plan what words exactly to teach and what strategies to employ to introduce them.
Examples of their responses follow:
Mazin: I don’t have to plan which word[s] to teach because they are
already planned in the teacher’s book, but what strategies to use
to teach them, I leave to lesson circumstances … Sometimes
I feel [that the] translation technique is enough, and at other
times I use available book pictures.
Ali: What words to teach are there in [the] teacher’s book, but
sometimes in class, I feel that there is a need to teach other
words not included in [the] teacher[’s] book … If flash cards
47
[are] available, I use them to teach the words-- this is a strategy,
but for other words I teach them in different ways depending on
students’ reaction.
Thus, the reasons which the teachers gave to justify students’ weakness in
vocabulary discussed at the beginning of this section above could not be the only
factors. The teaching style of these teachers apparently plays a major role in
compounding this problem, a role which goes unnoticed by the teachers. What’s
more, none of the techniques, which appeared in their teaching style, were used in a
way that achieved the criteria for effective vocabulary teaching discussed in the
literature review above. Accordingly, the answer to the second posited research
question in this study (i.e., do the techniques that the participating teachers use in their
classrooms reflect the various methods of teaching vocabulary discussed in the recent
literature on vocabulary instruction?) is a definite ‘no’. Although the participating
teachers are aware to an extent of some of the effective vocabulary teaching methods
addressed in the literature (i.e., the context and recycling techniques), they do not
employ these methods in their classrooms for the various reasons discussed above.
48
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Introduction
In this section I will start by summarizing the important findings which I arrived
to through analyzing the collected data in the previous sections. Then, I will move to
talk about the implications that could be inferred from the findings of the study for the
different parties which constitute the educational dichotomy.
Summary of Findings
The participants in the study all grant vocabulary high significance in their
philosophy of teaching which is compatible with the importance assigned vocabulary
teaching in recent literature in the field of TESOL. However, they believe that their
students’ level of proficiency in vocabulary is far behind the required level in the
grades which they are teaching despite the efforts they claimed to exert in that area.
They justified this lack of proficiency by citing the students’ negative attitude towards
the English language and the length of the curriculum. Through the analysis of the
data collected with initial interviews and observations, it became obvious that there
are some discrepancies between what the teachers said that they do and what they
actually do in their EFL classes. The discrepancies appeared in the following areas:
the teachers claimed that they provided context for new words, used the translation
method as the last resort, and took students’ level of proficiency into consideration
when choosing methods to teach abstract versus concrete words. In the post-
observation interviews, the teachers attributed these discrepancies to being over
49
stressed because of two factors: the restriction which the Ministry of Education places
upon teachers to follow its curriculum solely and the time it takes to meet the
curriculum requirements. Generally, the analysis showed that the techniques which
are used by the participants to teach vocabulary items are miming, book pictures,
realia, flash cards, drawing, defining in English and the translation method. Finally,
the participants reported that they do not teach their students strategies to learn
vocabulary outside of class, which does not reflect the norms set in the literature for
teaching vocabulary.
Implications
This section discusses the practical implications of the study first for language
teachers in Omani government schools, and second for the Ministry of Education in
Oman. It is important to note here that some of the suggestions addressed to teachers
hinge upon the implications for the Ministry of Education.
Implications for Teachers
The main implication for language teachers in Omani government schools is
that these teachers should reassess some of their approaches to teaching vocabulary
and expand their repertoire of vocabulary teaching techniques. Although the
participating teachers appeared to be aware of some of the most effective methods of
teaching new vocabulary items to their EFL students, some felt that they had to resort
to less effective shortcut techniques (such as the translation method) in order to meet
the requirements set by the Ministry of Education within the allotted time. However,
if the English language proficiency of students in Omani government schools is to
50
improve significantly, these shortcut methods cannot be a staple in their EFL
classrooms.
In addition, central to better vocabulary acquisition and retention is for
teachers to keep in mind the proficiency levels of their students when deciding upon
the vocabulary items to be taught and the methods of vocabulary teaching to be
employed. In other words, what works for beginner students does not always work for
higher level students and vice versa. For example, the Word Links technique is not
effective if used with beginners because it presupposes a higher level of linguistic
proficiency, which is vital for analyzing and discussing relationships between words.
As well, teachers need to know when and how to reinforce the learning of these words
since acquiring a word thoroughly does not happen from “single meetings” as noted
above. New vocabulary words must be revisited a number of times using different
examples to expose students to the various uses and connotations which words might
have. This “recycling” is fundamental for providing the necessary repetitions to
promote acquiring and retaining a word. “If recycling is neglected, many partially
known words will be forgotten, wasting all the effort already put into learning them”
(Richards, 2000, p. 137).
Furthermore, Omani government school language teachers must differentiate
between using techniques to explain vocabulary items and teaching students useful
techniques to learn vocabulary on their own. Teachers should strive to develop and
encourage learner autonomy in order to help their students become active learners
when it comes to dealing with any vocabulary quandaries without always having to
rely on the presence and help of the teacher. Successful vocabulary learners are those
who are able to take responsibility for their own learning and know how to utilize
51
vocabulary learning strategies on their own (Atay & Ozbulgan, 2007). This is vital
considering the short amount of time that these teachers can allocate to teaching
English language vocabulary items to their students. Hence, it is the responsibility of
teachers to employ and teach the most pertinent teaching and learning strategies for
their teaching context and for their particular students, if their students are to develop
their vocabulary independently, and accordingly improve their language proficiency.
Implications for the Ministry of Education
The Omani Ministry of Education is well-advised to conduct workshops and
seminars for Omani government school EFL teachers aimed at providing these
teachers with an overview of current and effective methods of teaching English
language vocabulary as well as learner strategies for acquiring new vocabulary items.
Only through the full support, flexibility, and understanding of the Ministry of
Education will Omani government school language teachers truly be able to help their
students to achieve proficiency in the English language.
In addition, the Ministry should consider adjusting its approach to the English
language curriculum and its expectations of its government school teachers especially
within the limited time given to teach English during academic years. To this end, the
voices of the teachers should be taken into consideration because they have
experienced teaching the assigned curriculum under the restrictions present in the
government school context, such as curriculum length and the time allotted. Thus,
they are more aware of the positive and negative aspects of its application.
Furthermore, they are in direct contact with their students, which should yield specific
and purposeful suggestions toward the improvement of the curriculum and their
52
students’ proficiency in English. The import of taking into account teachers’ voices
(as well as learners’ voices conveyed by teachers) in the process of improving
curricula has been widely discussed in recent literature (e.g., Bohn & Sleeter, 2000;
Sleeter, 2000, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999).
Accordingly, the Ministry of Education should give its government school
teachers more freedom in terms of the materials that can be used in class beyond the
Ministry-approved curriculum. For example, teachers through interaction with their
students might stumble upon topics which their students are eager to learn about. The
teachers should have the freedom to introduce authentic teaching materials related to
these topics in order to enhance their students’ learning experiences and better engage
them in the language learning process. For example, teachers can search for texts
(from newspapers, magazines, …etc.) that includes the words they are planning to
teach in order to introduce the words used in reality, the level of the learners has to be
considered, of course. After discussing the meaning of those words, the teachers can
ask the students to make use of those words in useful sentences, or the teachers can
ask the learners to search for other texts in which the words are used and bring them
to class. A further thing that teachers can do is to create a communicative situation, in
class, that requires the use of the words under focus. Employing authentic materials
relevant and of interest to students in order to arouse students’ curiosity has been
asserted by many scholars (e.g., Long, 2002; Larimer & Schleicher, 1999). As a result
of adopting interesting authentic materials in Omani government schools, the attitudes
of students in these schools towards the English language could improve, which in
turn could help solve one of the problems that many Omani government school
teachers appear to face in their ESL classrooms.
53
To wrap up, conducting seminars and workshops aimed to enlighten the
teachers about effective methods of vocabulary instruction as viewed in current
literature, considering adjusting the approach to the English language curriculum, and
giving school teachers more freedom in terms of the material that can be used in class
are the main steps that the Omani Ministry of Education needs to take if tangible
improvements are sought in the field of teaching English language vocabulary in
Omani government schools.
Limitations of the Study
There are two main limitations to this study that readers should keep in mind
when considering its results and implications. First, this study was a case study of the
EFL teachers at a specific government school in Oman. Therefore, readers are
cautioned to consider the boundaries of this study and the description of the context of
the study when deciding whether or not the results and implications are applicable
and/or meaningful to their context. More case studies tackling the same research focus
are needed in order to solidify and verify the extent of this study’s transferability.
Second, the number of observations undertaken during the course of the study was
limited to three classroom observations per participating teacher. Three observations
may not be enough to reflect the full extent of the different participants’ vocabulary
teaching styles and methods. Researchers interested in conducting further studies
regarding vocabulary teaching techniques in EFL classrooms should design more
longitudinal (case or general) studies in which participants are observed over the
course of at least one academic year rather than one semester. This could yield further
and clearer explanations for any discrepancies found between what teachers report as
54
their perceptions regarding the vocabulary teaching techniques they employ and their
actual behavior and teaching methods in their EFL classrooms.
Final Thought
Despite the limitations mentioned above, the study could be a starting point
that contributes in revealing whether the problem with vocabulary instruction in
AbdulRahman bin Auff is a common problem with other government schools or it is
just specific to the school under the study. Moreover, it could show the extent to
which vocabulary instruction affects students’ vocabulary proficiency by comparing
schools which have good approaches for teaching vocabulary with less effective
schools. In addition, the study could reveal with more prominence the difficulties that
teachers go through within the context of government schools which will give the
Ministry of Education no choice other than looking seriously for solutions to those
difficulties.
For those obvious points, I strongly recommend conducting similar studies
within a wider context. That is, more schools and teachers need to be included to
know the extent in which the issues raised in this study present in government schools
in Oman.
55
References
Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for
qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Amer, A. (2002). Advanced vocabulary instruction in EFL. The Internet TESL
Journal, 8(11). Retrieved June10, 2005, from
http://www.iteslj.org/Articles/Amer-Vocabulary/
Atay, D., & Ozbulgan, C. (2007). Memory strategy instruction, contextual learning
And ESP vocabulary recall. English for Specific Purposes 26 (1), 39-51.
Retrieved February 7, 2008, from the ERIC database.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust
vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.
Berg. B. L. (2001) Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th ed.).
London: Allyn & Bacon.
Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. J. (2006). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (3rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Bogaards, P. (2001). Lexical units and the learning of foreign language vocabulary.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 321-343.
Bohn, A., & Sleeter, C. (2000). Multicultural education and the standards movement.
Phi Delta Kappan, 82 (2), 156.
Bromely, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher hould know about words and
vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(7), 528-
537.
Burns, S., & Grove, A. (1993). “There’s a certain slant of light”: The experience of
56
discovery in qualitative interviewing. The Occupational Therapy Journal of
Research, 17 (2), 110-129.
Carl B, S. (2003a). Vocabulary development: Elaboration for writing. ERIC Topical
Bibliography and Commentary, (071), 3-6. Retrieved April 21, 2007, from the
ERIC database.
Carl B, S. (2003b). Vocabulary’s influence on successful writing. ERIC Publications,
(071), 3-6. Retrieved September 21, 2006, from the ERIC database.
Coomber, J., Peet, H., & Smith, C. (1998). Teaching vocabulary: A methods course.
Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 6(2), 12-14. Retrieved
September 4, 2006, from the ERIC database.
Croll, C. (1971). Teaching vocabulary. College Composition and Communication,
22(5), 378-380. Retrieved September 4, 2006, from the ERIC database.
Ediger, M. (1999). Reading and vocabulary development. Journal of Instructional
Psychology, 26(1), 7. Retrieved October 29, 2006, from the Academic Search
Premier database.
Engber, C. A. (1995). The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL
compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(2), 139-155.
Fan, Y. M. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of
second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The
Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 222-241
Foil, C. R., & Alber, S, R. (2002). Fun and effective ways to build your students’
vocabulary. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(3), 131-138.
Folse, K. S. (2004). Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to
classroom teaching. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
57
Fuente, M. J. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: investigating the role of
pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching
Research, 10(3), 263-295.
Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New
York: Longman.
Grace, C. (1998). Retention of word meanings inferred from context and sentence-
level translations: Implications for the design of beginning-level CALL
software. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 533-544.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of
naturalistic inquiry. ECTJ, 30 (4), 233-252.
Hammersley, M. (2000). The relevance of qualitative research. Oxford Review of
Education, 26 (3 &4), 393-405.
Heinecke, W. F., & Stohl Drier, H. (1998). Research for better classroom practice and
policy. The Educational Forum, 62, 273-280.
Herod, A. (1993). Gender issues in the use of interviewing as a research method.
Professional Geographer, 4 (3), 305-317.
Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2005). Aframework for developing EFL reading
vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 23-51.
Jarvis, S., & Stephens, R. (1994). Going beyond standard English: An instructional
module for improving international business communication. Paper presented
at the Annual Conference on Languages and Communication for World
Business and the Professions (13th, Ypsilanti, MI, April 13-16, 1994). (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED. 377 738)
58
Kamil, M. L., & Hiebert, E. H. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary:
Perspectives and persistent issues. In E. H. Hiebert & M. L. Kamil (Eds.),
Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 1 -23).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kleinasser, A. M. (2000). Researchers, reflexivity, and good data: Writing to unlearn.
Theory into Practice, 39 (3), 155-162.
Knight, S. (1994). Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and
vocabulary acquisition for students of different verbal abilities. Modern
Language Journal, 78, 285-299.
Larimer, R. E., & Schleicher, L. (Eds.). (1999). New ways of using authentic
materials in the classroom. Alexandria, V A: TESOL.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second
language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics,
22(1), 1-26.
Lee, S. H., & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL
learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. TESOL
Quarterly, 40(2), 39-53.
Literacy Coordinators Office of Reading/Language Arts. (2003). What every
DeKalb administrator needs to know about the balanced approach to
literacy: A guide to successful implementation. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 480 269)
Long, S. (2002). Tuning in to teacher-talk: A second language learner
struggles to comprehend. Reading: Lliteracy and Language, 36 (3),
113-18.
59
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. R. (1993). Reading dictionaries, and vocabulary
learning. Language Learning, 43, 263-287.
McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods for English
language teachers. London: Renold.
Merriam, S. B. (1992). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle &
Heinle.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of
the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-
based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and
its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: Author.
North Central Regional Educational Lab. (2002). Reading comprehension instruction
in grades 4 – 8. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and
Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 480 264).
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Heinle &
Heinle.
Oakley, A. (1981). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In H. Roberts
(Ed.), Doing feminist research (pp. 30-61). London: Routledge.
Ratcliff, G. R. (1994). Indicators of effective student learning in English composition:
A review of the literature. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research
and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 371 670).
60
Richards, J. C. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sagarra, N., & Alba, M. (2006). The key is in the keyword: L2 vocabulary
learning methods with beginning learners of Spanish. The Modern
Language Journal, 90(6), 228-243. Retrieved April 21, 2007, from the
ERIC database.
Scheurich, J. J. (1997). Research method in the postmodern. Philadelphia, PA:
Routledge Falmer.
Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Sleeter, C. E. (2000). Creating an empowering multicultural curriculum. Race,
Gender, & Class, 7 (3), 178-196.
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools:
Research and the overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of
Teacher Education, 52 (2), 94-106.
Stahl, S. A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Tannenbaum, K. R., Torgesen, J. K., & Wagner, R. K. (2006). Relationships
between word knowledge and reading comprehension in third-grade
children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 381 – 398.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive Schooling: U.S.- Mexican Youth and the
Politics of Caring. New York: State University of New York Press.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative
interview studies. New York: The Free Press.
61
Yopp, R., Brigman, J., Wood, K., & Fink, L. (2007). Word links: A strategy
for developing word Knowledge. Voices From the Middle, 15(1), 27-33.
Retrieved February 7, 2008, from the ERIC database.
62
Appendix A
Initial Interview Guide
Time started: Time ended: Teacher: _____________________________________________________________________ 1-
A- Where does vocabulary teaching stand in your teaching philosophy? Do you give it priority, for example?
B- Why does vocabulary teaching take that position in your philosophy? 2- How do you teach vocabulary in your classes? 3- A- How do you think that teaching vocabulary affects the improvement of
your students’ English level? 4-
A- What are the sources of the vocabulary that you teach in your class?
B- (if the teacher limits himself to the vocabulary in the curriculum) Why do you choose to teach the vocabulary available in the curriculum? C- (if the teacher uses other sources) On what bases do you choose that vocabulary?
5-
A- How many new words do you usually teach in a lesson?
B- Do you usually teach new vocabulary in a lesson assigned only to teach vocabulary, or you do that as part of a lesson?
C- How do you feel about your students’ vocabulary level?
D- D- Do you think that you need to give vocabulary more time or what you
are doing is enough? Why? 6-
A- What are the techniques that you use to teach vocabulary? B- What is the technique that you use the most? Why?
63
7-
A- What do you do with newly taught vocabulary in later lessons?
B- How do you usually review it if you have a plan of any sort?
C- When do you do that, the next lesson, for example? 8- What are the purposes that you have teaching vocabulary other than expanding vocabulary when you teach new words if any?
64
Appendix B
Post-observation Follow-up Interview Guide Time started: Time ended: Teacher: _____________________________________________________________________ 1- When I observed your class, I noticed that you taught 10 words. How does that match the importance you give to vocabulary in your philosophy of teaching? (if this applies to teacher) 2-
A- Do you plan what words exactly to teach and what strategies to introduce them? How?
B- In one (or more) of your lessons, you taught six (or more) new words. Does
that correspond with the pace in which your students grasp the meaning of new words? (if the teacher teaches more than five words)
3- I noticed that you lean more toward the ……… technique, you used with most of the new words that you taught. Why is that? 4- In most cases, as I observed the purpose behind teaching new words was __________ . Why do you think is that? 5- Do you teach your students strategies to be independent in learning vocabulary? How? 6- Do you think that the situation in government school helps you apply your philosophy of teaching vocabulary? How? 7- To what extent do you think that the time given to the syllabus assigned is enough? Why?
65
Appendix C
Observation Sheet
Date: Place: Level: Teacher: Lesson: Started: Ended: Number of students: Techniques used to explain words: Number of times technique is used: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses context: ______ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses translation ______ right from the beginning: Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses translation ______ as a last resort: Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________
66
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses miming: ______ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses drawing : ______ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 *Teacher uses flash cards: ______ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses a game: ______ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____
67
Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses _______________ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses _______________ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 * Teacher uses _______________ Kinds of words: - nouns 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - verbs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ - adjectives 1 2 3 4 5 6 _____ - ……………1 2 3 4 5 6 ____ Purpose of - Expanding vocabulary. – Clarifying a point. - _____________ teaching words: - Facilitates understanding a text. - _____________ Words dealt with in the lesson: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Number of reviewed words: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Number of new taught words:
68
Time allotted: The words were taught: - in the first third of the lesson
- In the second third of the lesson - in the last third of the lesson - in the whole class
69
VITA
Badr Al Jabri is a secondary school teacher in a government school in Oman.
He has been teaching for four years. He obtained his bachelor’s degree in Teaching
English Language from Sultan Qaboos University in 2004. He presented a workshop
entitled “Reading Startegies” in his school in 2006 and attended several workshops
and seminars in English language teaching such as “Feedback to Improve Writing.”
He has been a school supervisor for student teachers from the College of Education in
Sohar and from Sohar University in Al Batinah region. He participated in the annual
English Conference which is held in Sultan Qaboos University.
